A Third Of Fans Watch Illegal Streams

[tlr]

10 minutes ago, Dan said:

My prediction is they knock it down to a tenner.

It's an interesting one. A tenner is what us non-season ticket holders for EFL teams pay per match too (not exactly easy to find decent streams either if we don't). I agree £15 is steep for something like Burnley v. Newcastle, but a tenner essentially assigns the same value to Arsenal v. Everton (or whatever) as Mansfield v. Barrow. Not that I'm sure what the solution is otherwise...

[Dan+]

1 minute ago, tlr said:

It's an interesting one. A tenner is what us non-season ticket holders for EFL teams pay per match too (not exactly easy to find decent streams either if we don't). I agree £15 is steep for something like Burnley v. Newcastle, but a tenner essentially assigns the same value to Arsenal v. Everton (or whatever) as Mansfield v. Barrow. Not that I'm sure what the solution is otherwise...

It is an odd one, it's quite a backwards situation as I feel the same about ticket prices, they're unnecessarily expensive in the Premier League but you can't really make it cheaper than the lower leagues, where they do rely on their ticket sales significantly more.

[Stan]

Definitely think there should be something done for STH and membership holders (if you signed up to be a member by a certain date ie before the start of the season). A fixed (extortionate) fee like they've done here is just ridiculous considering several fans have already forked out for season tickets or membership fees and TV subscriptions to Sky and BT as it is. 

Surely the Premier League can liaise with the clubs and come to a compromise? It'll reward loyalty of fans that already would have gone to games anyway and not make them feel like they're being fucked over in an already shit time in not being able to go. 

It'd be good if more money went to the clubs as opposed to the TV companies though? Wasn't it announced something like £3 of the £14.95 goes to the club and the rest to Sky/BT/Premier League? If it was a higher percentage going to the club it's probably a bit more justified to charge something (not that I agree anyway). If more goes to the club its like paying for a ticket anyway which most fans would have done. That's relatively more acceptable than this fee. It shouldn't be PPV at all but it's inconceivable to think there'll be a change to that any time soon. 

 

I think it does speak volumes they refused to release the numbers for how many actually paid for games last week. They don't want to be shown up to just how shite the idea was and how few fans/viewers paid for it. 

[LFCMike]

They're estimating 110,000 for Liverpool v Sheff Utd. Worth noting that this is viewers and not individual households/subscribers

[Dr. Gonzo]

22 minutes ago, LFCMike said:

They're estimating 110,000 for Liverpool v Sheff Utd. Worth noting that this is viewers and not individual households/subscribers

How do they estimate viewers and not households? Like how would they know how many people live at a house that paid for the match?

[Dan+]

On 25/10/2020 at 15:18, Dan said:

My prediction is they knock it down to a tenner.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Nostra@Danmos

[LFCMike]

27 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

How do they estimate viewers and not households? Like how would they know how many people live at a house that paid for the match?

No idea. Article just mentions the sample is 5,300 households

[RandoEFC+]

59 minutes ago, Dan said:

 

It's not to quell the backlash though is it? It's because nobody has been paying the money and it's hurting them in the pocket. If they reduce it to a tenner and people tell themselves they've been met halfway and cough up, then they'll make more money. Easing fan anger will be a secondary by-product of their actions.

It's funny how quickly they can correct things that are wrong when it affects them financially.

[Dan+]

10 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

It's not to quell the backlash though is it? It's because nobody has been paying the money and it's hurting them in the pocket. If they reduce it to a tenner and people tell themselves they've been met halfway and cough up, then they'll make more money. Easing fan anger will be a secondary by-product of their actions.

It's funny how quickly they can correct things that are wrong when it affects them financially.

It was the plan all along. It was very obvious to me what would happen. It's a tactically frequently used in football (and business), serve up a something rubbish for a short period of time, then come up with a compromise that is still a piss-take but slightly less shit than before, and therefore get away with it.

I do think free to air is unsustainable but this is an extraordinary situation and as per usual it's the fans who get shat on. They cannot win. Looks like the clubs spent big money in the summer and have realised their income isn't compensating for it. Should be interesting to see what happens next year. I'm glad we didn't spend that big actually.

[Dr. Gonzo]

Does anyone have an answer to the question @RandoEFC asked earlier? Where does the money go? I tried Googling for an answer and... I didn't find anything. I'm assuming the money goes to the league, rather than the clubs playing in those matches. I'm not basing that assumption off anything though... but I imagine if it was a scheme to make up for the lack of clubs getting gate receipts during COVID, they'd have made that pretty clear? I'd imagine there'd have been less backlash if that's what they were doing in the first place.

Also, as I don't know anyone that's paid for these streams while illegal streams exist... do you get anything other than the ability to view that match live?

I ask because over the weekend, I paid for the livestream of a concert of one of my favourite bands because I've been missing concerts. It's nowhere near the same experience, or anywhere close to it. But at least I got a link to view that livestreamed concert in full whenever I want & got the ability to download the concert to a file. So you get something a bit more tangible than you would with a normal concert... which is fair enough because what you're getting from watching a stream isn't going to adequately replace the atmosphere and experience. I'd say that's a fairly similar experience to paying for a stream of a football match - you're not getting a lot of what is most appealing about going to watch football live.

For £10-15 a match... the league should be at least giving fans something more than just a one-time stream, surely? I don't think they are (because otherwise, they'd make that more clear - wouldn't they?). If they want people to spend the money, surely they've got to be doing something to make it more worth the money for all of us?

But also I'd like an answer to Rando's question... where does this money go?

[ScoRoss]

Mike Ashley wants the prices cut to £5 a match, with half going to the EFL.

[LFCMike]

Does anyone remember Prem Plus which was a PPV service? I seem to remember that being about for a few years in the early 2000s. I was far too young to remember how much it was, anyone remember? 

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, LFCMike said:

Does anyone remember Prem Plus which was a PPV service? I seem to remember that being about for a few years in the early 2000s. I was far too young to remember how much it was, anyone remember? 

I remember it existed... but that's about it. Back then, I think I saw PPV and I just knew it meant "something my dad is definitely not going to pay for."

[Burning Gold]

2 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Does anyone have an answer to the question @RandoEFC asked earlier? Where does the money go? I tried Googling for an answer and... I didn't find anything. I'm assuming the money goes to the league, rather than the clubs playing in those matches. I'm not basing that assumption off anything though... but I imagine if it was a scheme to make up for the lack of clubs getting gate receipts during COVID, they'd have made that pretty clear? I'd imagine there'd have been less backlash if that's what they were doing in the first place.

Also, as I don't know anyone that's paid for these streams while illegal streams exist... do you get anything other than the ability to view that match live?

I ask because over the weekend, I paid for the livestream of a concert of one of my favourite bands because I've been missing concerts. It's nowhere near the same experience, or anywhere close to it. But at least I got a link to view that livestreamed concert in full whenever I want & got the ability to download the concert to a file. So you get something a bit more tangible than you would with a normal concert... which is fair enough because what you're getting from watching a stream isn't going to adequately replace the atmosphere and experience. I'd say that's a fairly similar experience to paying for a stream of a football match - you're not getting a lot of what is most appealing about going to watch football live.

For £10-15 a match... the league should be at least giving fans something more than just a one-time stream, surely? I don't think they are (because otherwise, they'd make that more clear - wouldn't they?). If they want people to spend the money, surely they've got to be doing something to make it more worth the money for all of us?

But also I'd like an answer to Rando's question... where does this money go?

Everything I've read (from the likes of Miguel Delaney, Henry Winter, etc. on Twitter) says that the money does in fact go to the clubs as a way to compensate for lost gate receipts. I thought that was fairly common knowledge (not having a pop!) but interested to know if it's not as that would contextualise that backlash. Although I think in general as a country we don't think enough about where our money goes, just that it leaves our pockets, so perhaps wouldn't make much of a difference

What "money goes to the clubs" actually means though I don't know. Does it go into a pot to be split 20 ways, or does it go to the two teams playing? How is that split if so? Is it 50:50 or some weird convoluted process like the EFL have which essentially serves to give as little money as possible to smaller clubs. @Stan mentioned earlier that only about £3 goes to clubs, although I'm not sure where he read that. Stan?

50 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I remember it existed... but that's about it. Back then, I think I saw PPV and I just knew it meant "something my dad is definitely not going to pay for."

I used to leave the advert on because it was essentially rolling football highlights (of the same 4 goals)  Got drilled into me that it was £1 per game. I think indivual games were a bit more (like £5) but you could get the whole lot for £1/game

Oops meant to quote @LFCMike there

[Smiley Culture]

Still think that season ticket holders should be getting these games for nothing. I get the “donation”/“goodwill gesture” suggestions from people but they’re getting nothing for their money and clubs, not that they’re really bothered by this sort of thing anyway, aren’t doing much to dispel the “customers, not fans” shouts. 

Even at a tenner, I’m still not going to pay to buy a game. I’d rather spend a tenner on going to a game near me on the Saturday and watching a stream for a game on the Sunday. 

[Honey Honey]

19 hours ago, ScoRoss said:

Mike Ashley wants the prices cut to £5 a match, with half going to the EFL.

Absolutely howling. If he said a fiver that's a fair enough round figure but instead he said £4.95  got to get that pricing psychology trick in there. Then he started calling on the government to remove tax.

I would fucking love it if he went on Dragons Den. Someone would go on with a covid vaccine and he'd be like "first thing we need to do is put sale stickers all over this"

[Stan]

1 minute ago, Steve Bruce Almighty said:

Absolutely howling. If he said a fiver that's a fair enough round figure but instead he said £4.95  got to get that pricing psychology trick in there. Then he started calling on the government to remove tax.

I would fucking love it if he went on Dragons Den. Someone would go on with a covid vaccine and he'd be like "first thing we need to do is put sale stickers all over this"

Free vaccine with every Sports Direct mug sold. 

[Dan+]

PPV has encouraged me to make more of an effort to find better streaming sites and I've been successful, so I won't pay a thing now. They can get fucked.

[Rick]

1 hour ago, Dan said:

PPV has encouraged me to make more of an effort to find better streaming sites and I've been successful, so I won't pay a thing now. They can get fucked.

Could you possibly share this success through dm? 

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, Dan said:

PPV has encouraged me to make more of an effort to find better streaming sites and I've been successful, so I won't pay a thing now. They can get fucked.

I'm not surprised, so many of my friends' reactions to this has basically been this:

 

[Dan+]

3 hours ago, Rick said:

Could you possibly share this success through dm? 

Do you have Android?

[Rick]

9 hours ago, Dan said:

Do you have Android?

Yes I do

[Lucas]

6 hours ago, Rick said:

Yes I do

I love the way we are passing down the torch from one person to the other 

[Storts+]

We have our first PPV game on Sunday. Got to be honest I’ll probably be a snake and pay the £15. Only stream as a last resort if no other alternative and just don’t like dealing with the poorer quality and pop ups etc.